unsubscribeCancel a subscription by id. Ownership is enforced — you can only cancel your own subscriptions. The row is deactivated (not deleted) so its historical events stay available via recent_alerts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Subscription id (uuid) returned by subscribe. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and idempotency (idempotentHint=true). Description adds ownership enforcement and clarifies deactivation vs deletion, providing beyond what annotations provide.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple single-parameter mutation with no output schema and rich annotations, the description covers ownership, effect on data, and idempotency implication, making it fully complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'id', so the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb 'Cancel' and resource 'subscription by id'. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like 'subscribe' and 'list_subscriptions'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
States ownership enforcement ('only cancel your own subscriptions') and notes that the row is deactivated not deleted, providing context for when to use. Could mention explicit alternatives, but context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but the ask_pipeworx family (standard, beta, grounded) and validate_claim vs ask_pipeworx_grounded may cause some confusion for agents despite detailed descriptions.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case pattern, and most are verb_noun structures (e.g., ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, resolve_entity), making them predictable and easy to distinguish.
With 32 tools, the set is larger than ideal but well-justified by the broad scope of data sources and functionalities (email verification, SEC/FDA lookups, prediction market analysis, memory, subscriptions).
The tool set covers the full pipeline from data discovery (discover_tools, suggest_questions) to retrieval, analysis, comparison, verification, and monitoring, with no obvious gaps for its intended use cases.